Models at these events are sales people, and generally perform the function very well. They are the ones providing a sense of trust and enticing people to look and ask about products. If you bothered to read any of the articles at all you would see that people have an automatic trust for someone attractive, and an automatic distrust of someone not attractive. Sexuality has been a method of selling for as long as we have been selling. I'll add that it's not restricted to women, but the audience at an event dictates which type of people you have working. More men in attendance, more women selling. At an event with more women, you would want to increase males.
I should add that "booth babe" does not imply someone walking around in a thong bikini, but an exceptionally attractive person dressed right for the occasion.
While correct, I'd say that the models hired for these events make more money than being a woman in IT. Attractivepeoplealways make bettersalespeople. You may not like that fact, but human nature (that fact) does not care how you feel. (Plenty more citations for you to find if you are interested in those pesky things called studies.
What's old is new again. Wasn't this discovered in the early 90's?
late 70s and early 80s actually. Military technology has had VR for a very long time, though we used to call it "Stereo". DOD specifications stated that Stereo should not be used for more than 3-6 hours per week and we used to have to keep log books for Engineers and Visitors to ensure they did not go over the maximum. I built a full power wall theater with VR, 4 projectors and full motion tracking, and a portable version of the same hardware with manually movable walls. Power walls for people that don't know can operate at either 3 displays flat for 8'X30', various angles on the outer walls up to a 90degree enclosed cave with the 4th projector on the floor at 8'x8'. Hardware was SGI Onyx with Infinite Reality graphics and a Linux cluster of 5 nodes running 2 each NVidia Quadro FX custom cards. Software varied from protected to commercial. The best was commercial CEI Ensight for display control.
There is a lot that can help with reducing depth and eye position to remove strain, but that tends to reduce the effects of VR where getting a majority of people "comfortable" resulted in no depth.
Well, you are technically correct in the first part, but a computer is much more than a chip and a power supply. Cool in my opinion that they can get them to run on the Moon and Mars, but Venus adds quite a few new challenges other than heat and pressure. Namely, the corrosive gasses under the same heat and pressure.
Your second part is correct for computers that are space worthy, but not true for computers on earth. Most chips in Earth's atmosphere are exposed to the atmosphere. Legs of a chip are not coming out of an environment proof seal, and they are not air proof. You are half right, and my generalization for a space worthy computer was wrong.
Your last part is answered with: "The chip, a simple 3-stage oscillator, kept functioning at a steady 1.26MHz for 521 hours (21.7) days before the GEER had to be shut down." So they don't have a functional computer, but they have interconnects that could handle heat from a very slow oscillator. A computer is a whole lot more components, with a whole lot more IO, generating a whole heat.
Don't misunderstand, I think the goal is noble. I'd love to have some atmospheric data coming from Venus, information on surface, weather, etc.. like we do on Mars. I just disagree with using Hyperbole to sell the concept.
First, a computer is a whole lot more than just a chip. How about boards, wire runs, resisters, transistors? But the atmosphere of Venus contains massive amounts of toxic gasses. If we have a computer chip that operates at high temperatures, what is it made of and how quickly does it break down inside the atmosphere of Venus?
So not only don't we have a computer that works on Venus, we don't have chips that work on Venus. TFA says that they may have a chip that operates at high temperatures but since it has not quite been invented yet we can't test the viability of said chip in Venus' atmosphere. Not only am I cynical, but I'm really tired of the chronic hyperbole in seemingly everything.
Oh good grief, you keep moving the goal post and attempting to establish irrational scenarios. If a crime was committed and the police lack resources then you had better start paying more taxes to hire some more cops. Lack of prosecution is indicative of a systemic problem impacting way way more than a person renting their house out. Show me a jurisdiction where there are no unsolved crimes except for the guy renting his house out. I won't hold my breath waiting, but I'll ask you to hold your breath while looking to prove me wrong.
Please please please do us all a favor get back on the thorazine and leave the sane people alone to pursue their own interests.
So your claim is that somehow using AirBnB makes crime perfectly legal and nobody on the property can be held accountable for any criminal actions? I have yet to see a legal argument claiming AirBnB provides prosecutorial immunity to renters, yet that is somehow your allegation. Are you sane, or did you just forget to take your medication for a prolonged time period?
I rent my property for a day to someone else that is perfectly legal. This happened without AirBnB regularly, AirBnB simply made it _more_ available. YOU do not have the right to tell me I can't rent my property to someone else without me using AirBnB. The onus is on you to present reasonable arguments as to why I lose property rights when using the service.
Well suggest a way that people can be vetted properly then.
I'm not the one claiming AirBnB should be illegal, I simply gave an example of a possibly valid argument. If You are against someone renting their property _YOU_ need to provide an acceptable solution, not me.
Short of the property owner being there and held accountable for any issues I don't see how it could be done.
Well, I guess that explains a whole lot. You can't think of something which impacts a very small percentage of AirBnB so don't believe anyone with affiliation with AirBnB should have property rights. Thanks for proving my point.
For all that the Progressive Leftists claim to be against big business and for the working people, they sure as hell don't show it. AirBnB gives people the ability to rent out their property for a few extra bucks. It gives consumers a chance for a possibly better price and experience for accommodations when traveling. That takes the money away from Hotel conglomerates and massive union control and puts it back into the hands of the working people. Isn't that what the Left claims to be all for?
I find it very odd that instead of looking at perhaps viable concerns with "Does insurance cover certain events?" or "Do we need a vetting and registration process to ensure users are not criminals?" the politicians on the left move to _ban_ them with a vocal minority supporting them. The leftist followers and ideologues boycott and ostracize anyone who agrees with, works with, or uses the service. We just saw that with Uber, because how dare a person try to make money picking up people from the Airport when Union cabbies went on strike to support the lefts complaints about the immigration moratorium. By the way, a neighbor of mine who is a middle class legal immigrant may not be able to pay rent this month and he drives Uber Black and does not even handle airport pickups normally because #boycottuber (or whatever the hashtag is). Way to be for the little guys!
I think the bigger problem in society right now is a vocal minority of people refuse to have rational dialogue about any issue. The Right may have some past guilt , but the Left is most certainly guilty over the last several years and owns most of the media. Perhaps it's time for the Left to do what we demanded of the Right when they were deemed to be "too Christian", and start listening to the People as a whole instead of being dead set on forcing your ideology down people's throats.
Why would they need to do anything except relay location to existing ATC? They can't talk as there are no pilots. They fly along a narrowly defined corridor at an altitude that would not conflict with existing airports and all local aircraft would know about.
You are either trolling or not so bright. Show me an airport that does not border a freeway or major road. Not only that, but cars would have to be tracked by ATC to prevent crashing with each other. The current ATC systems lack the capacity.
I wonder how you don't hear about that all the time given helicopters exist? Oh that's right, they take off and land on designated zones you do not let people just flail arms around on.
Okay, you must be trolling because nobody can be that foolish. Not only are helicopters extremely rare in the skies (1-2 News choppers and an occasional Military/Coast Guard craft (that is the west SF Bay from SJC to Golden Gate), but they all take off and land from very controlled spaces. Helicopters are not only rare, but they don't take off and land in Google employee parking or your favorite restaurant parking. Get the difference?
As you accused some else in this thread, "you have displayed that you are an idiot and we can all assume the rest of your ideas are equally uninformed/absurd."
Safety issues for these flying cars, roads below them, and then consider the already overloaded ATC systems in the US. The idea may be interesting, but three years won't happen. Should it happen? Well, as the AC says above me, can we prevent drunk/bad drivers? Can we ensure that when one of these has an engine failure, it does not take out half a city block or a few dozen cars on the freeway making traffic much worse?
I hope he realizes also, that Helicopters are very dangerous and require a huge clear space for takeoff and landing. You are not going to have a bunch of loose propped cars buzzing around without people losing limbs.
We are not quite to the Jetson's level of technology, and won't be for way more than 3 years.
You didn't even bother to look for facts claiming that no method of searching was valid. Moderation on this site is, and has been, leftist for quite some time. Everything in my original post was based on facts, and your posts are based on feelings and a denial of the existence of facts. Yes, rational dialogue has left because you refuse to use any rational form of discussion. "Nuh uh" does not count as an argument.
This isn't about politics, rather, it's about humanity.
Liar, they are the same thing. You think that the US Government should forcefully take money from citizens regardless of their ability to give money to pay for foreign people. Meanwhile, US Citizens suffer from poor conditions remain in poor conditions because your ideology does not account for them. Which was my original point, US Citizens are in need of help too and the US Government is responsible for its own citizens first.
Leftist ideology functions on feeling, as you just demonstrated. Facts are seen as inconvenient, or simply ignored.
This was found doing a simple Google search for "refugee literacy rates". Stop trying to use Google as a source and use it as it was intended, as a Web Search Application.
The refugee education problem is not an issue of "try", it's an issue of both war and where they come from. Women and Girls in many of the countries where refugees come from are not allowed to go to school. At best they get ostracized for doing so, and at worse they get physically assaulted if they do. Syria was actually one of the best in the Middle East for across the board education, but that was before a bloody revolution started. Minors in general do not attend school in war torn areas, not because they don't want to but due to what should be obvious _real_ issues. Schools are destroyed, teachers get killed, all forms of people become targets for the other side (hostage, bondage, slavery), and families on the run can't settle in an area to establish schools.
You are not only oblivious to easy to find facts, you are oblivious to what War really is and does.
Oh, and fuck the censors who down mod anything that does not fit the Progressive Left narrative.
If you wanted information you would use Google to find reports from reputable sources, like the UN and agencies working with the refugees. Not claim that since headlines don't match your 2nd hand personal anecdote you are not looking. Your personal anecdote does not represent reality, and no you don't pay me to be your researcher.
Perform a basic frigging Google search and you can find the information. How about doing some basic research instead of relying on other people telling you things? Hell, even if I gave you citations you would still argue, which is why you won't do any.
The immigrants and refugees we are bringing in to the US are mostly illiterate, and I'm not talking about English (yes, about 2/3rds). Never mind IT jobs, what job can you perform at all when you are not literate? How easy is it to train someone who can not read or write in their own language, let alone a predominantly foreign language. The majority of these people need a decade or more of education prior to being what we would consider productive members of society.Germany is suffering pretty heavily from this now, though you won't hear much about it on the US "news". Thousands of people packed into villages with no jobs, no prospect for a job, and a sadly a small percentage that does not want to try to learn German or engage with the country hosting them.
The younger kids coming in are going to be the best off, because they are at the right age for primary education. Adults are quite different as there is a stigma associated with having to go attend schools, and culturally women can be ostracized for attending school.
But you ask the pertinent question, which I don't see many of the pro-immigration politicians trying to answer. I hear buzz phrases like "it's our duty", but when we have millions in our own country living in poverty the priority is wrong. I have empathy for the refugees, but I lived in Detroit for 45 years and have as much empathy for those people as I do refugees from a distant country.
Sure, "White Supremacists" can be blocked from Reddit, but what about the leftist nutjobs who believe that you should destroy other people's property and physically assault people with a different political viewpoint? I don't look at reddit as a rule, but I'd be willing to bet that extremist left wing groups exist on reddit and will not receive the same treatment as the "alt-right".
Honest question: Which thing is upsetting to you, that "leftish nutjobs" aren't being banned, or that "White Supremacists" are being banned?
My problem is the hypocrisy and dishonesty, neither of the things you point out. If Reddit alleges that it supports Free Speech then both sides should be allowed to air their opinions. If they claim that the company policy stops negative behavior, that should be the global policy and not favor a particular group.
I'm very much for free speech. You can say what you want, and me being offended is not a crime. I find this whole "You have no right to offend me" culture to be psychotic and infantile. I don't have to agree with you, but me or someone else being offended does not make it right to silence you. If you are a moron espousing flat earth beliefs, people will present better ideas and facts to show others that you are wrong. This is how society progresses.
Show me one statement I made which is not factual. When media cherry picks portions of a topic to fit an agenda, showing the rest of the topic is valid and correct. I'm not a Kelly Ann Conway fan, but that is exactly what her statement meant. Let me give you an easy example. The recent moratorium on immigration is touted as anti Muslim, racist, etc... ignores very basic facts.
Facts: The US does not run out and investigate people trying to enter the US. Like every other country in the world we rely on the country of origin to provide paperwork and validate status for any person trying to enter. The countries on the list are _all failed States_ who can not provide information on people traveling in and out of their countries with any reliability. Do you think there is any reliable Government agency in Syria or Libya who can validate that people leaving their countries are not criminals? (READ: That does not imply that everyone in a State is a criminal, it states explicitly that there is no way to validate the status of the foreign Government with any reliability.)
Given that set of facts most Americans (last poll was around 65%) understand why there is a travel ban and take no issue with it. Liberal media however won't provide any factual information on how immigration works, nor will them or the leftist politicians, explain the real issue. Instead, it's fear mongering opinions based on very little factual information.
I'm as critical and cynical of my Government as anyone you can find. At the same time, I will defend what is right when it's right. On this issue, and considering that the US is the largest target for terrorism in the world, I will defend them. Now if they had banned immigration from all 50 majority Muslim countries, or established religious testing (as some fear mongering liars have been attempting to claim), I would be fighting against the administration.
Sure, "White Supremacists" can be blocked from Reddit, but what about the leftist nutjobs who believe that you should destroy other people's property and physically assault people with a different political viewpoint? I don't look at reddit as a rule, but I'd be willing to bet that extremist left wing groups exist on reddit and will not receive the same treatment as the "alt-right". That is true with Facebook and Twitter, so I assume it true on Reddit. Feel free to prove me wrong on that, I'll be happy to read about Reddit banning left wing nut jobs.
Frankly, if I had to look at who is worse right now I'd say it's the extremist progressive leftists who see no issues using violence against people simply because they have a different political view. In the last couple years, I have seen no valid reports of white supremacists out beating people. We have seen dozens of faked claims, and many of those have resulted in charges, but the "Right" has not been rioting and beating anyone. I have seen countless instances of leftists doing just that, and worse. Last night you have a young lady being interviewed on ABC punched in the face and pepper sprayed by one of these "oppressed" liberals. You have another pulled out of a car and beaten for no reason.
When you have a Government not prosecuting, or even arresting people, who are terrorizing people and preventing their free speech you will end up with a whole lot of violence from the other side. Hence you have a Trump supporter shooting an agitator at a separate rally after protesters started throwing bricks and rocks at people supporting the speaker showed up to counter protest.
People need to pay close attention to the rhetoric being used by the left right now. Sadly, the useful idiots really can't see the irony and hypocrisy in shutting down other people's free speech by committing physical violence while carrying signs and chanting slogans claiming the other side is fascist. They are claiming that words are violence, and a teacher who is an advocate for violent protests claimed that words from someone raped her. I wish I was joking, but both of those are factual. The claims that words are somehow causing physical harm is being used to justify violence against anyone not agreeing with (or bending over for) the leftists.
Trying times we are in right now, and in places like California I envision it getting worse before it gets better.
Automation is already happening, and has been for 30 or so years. Ask an automotive factory worker about that one if you have doubts. While we could have a debate about the merits of minimum wage, the fact that you jumped to hyperbole makes me doubt your capacity to do so.
Minimum wage is absolutely a challenge to discuss and map out. When the only jobs available are clerks, cooks, and counter service it's difficult to argue against a living wage for those jobs. It's that, or Government assistance programs (sorry, you are not entitled to my money so I refuse to call them "entitlements"). I don't believe that it's necessary to have those jobs as the only jobs, but it requires a change to the economy to re-establish a strong middle class. Only so much can be automated with countless jobs, like construction, and those markets are down since the 2008 collapse.
You are right that Tech workers are not immune to automation. If you are as smart as you think you are, your value to a company will continue to rise instead of stagnating. You probably won't be doing the same thing in a few years that you are today, and if you expect and plan for that you are going to remain valuable. My market value has increased drastically over my 30 year IT career, and I never moved to management.
Slashdot Mirror
Models at these events are sales people, and generally perform the function very well. They are the ones providing a sense of trust and enticing people to look and ask about products. If you bothered to read any of the articles at all you would see that people have an automatic trust for someone attractive, and an automatic distrust of someone not attractive. Sexuality has been a method of selling for as long as we have been selling. I'll add that it's not restricted to women, but the audience at an event dictates which type of people you have working. More men in attendance, more women selling. At an event with more women, you would want to increase males.
I should add that "booth babe" does not imply someone walking around in a thong bikini, but an exceptionally attractive person dressed right for the occasion.
While correct, I'd say that the models hired for these events make more money than being a woman in IT. Attractive people always make better sales people. You may not like that fact, but human nature (that fact) does not care how you feel. (Plenty more citations for you to find if you are interested in those pesky things called studies.
What's old is new again. Wasn't this discovered in the early 90's?
late 70s and early 80s actually. Military technology has had VR for a very long time, though we used to call it "Stereo". DOD specifications stated that Stereo should not be used for more than 3-6 hours per week and we used to have to keep log books for Engineers and Visitors to ensure they did not go over the maximum. I built a full power wall theater with VR, 4 projectors and full motion tracking, and a portable version of the same hardware with manually movable walls. Power walls for people that don't know can operate at either 3 displays flat for 8'X30', various angles on the outer walls up to a 90degree enclosed cave with the 4th projector on the floor at 8'x8'. Hardware was SGI Onyx with Infinite Reality graphics and a Linux cluster of 5 nodes running 2 each NVidia Quadro FX custom cards. Software varied from protected to commercial. The best was commercial CEI Ensight for display control.
There is a lot that can help with reducing depth and eye position to remove strain, but that tends to reduce the effects of VR where getting a majority of people "comfortable" resulted in no depth.
Well, you are technically correct in the first part, but a computer is much more than a chip and a power supply. Cool in my opinion that they can get them to run on the Moon and Mars, but Venus adds quite a few new challenges other than heat and pressure. Namely, the corrosive gasses under the same heat and pressure.
Your second part is correct for computers that are space worthy, but not true for computers on earth. Most chips in Earth's atmosphere are exposed to the atmosphere. Legs of a chip are not coming out of an environment proof seal, and they are not air proof. You are half right, and my generalization for a space worthy computer was wrong.
Your last part is answered with: "The chip, a simple 3-stage oscillator, kept functioning at a steady 1.26MHz for 521 hours (21.7) days before the GEER had to be shut down." So they don't have a functional computer, but they have interconnects that could handle heat from a very slow oscillator. A computer is a whole lot more components, with a whole lot more IO, generating a whole heat.
Don't misunderstand, I think the goal is noble. I'd love to have some atmospheric data coming from Venus, information on surface, weather, etc.. like we do on Mars. I just disagree with using Hyperbole to sell the concept.
First, a computer is a whole lot more than just a chip. How about boards, wire runs, resisters, transistors? But the atmosphere of Venus contains massive amounts of toxic gasses. If we have a computer chip that operates at high temperatures, what is it made of and how quickly does it break down inside the atmosphere of Venus?
So not only don't we have a computer that works on Venus, we don't have chips that work on Venus. TFA says that they may have a chip that operates at high temperatures but since it has not quite been invented yet we can't test the viability of said chip in Venus' atmosphere. Not only am I cynical, but I'm really tired of the chronic hyperbole in seemingly everything.
Oh good grief, you keep moving the goal post and attempting to establish irrational scenarios. If a crime was committed and the police lack resources then you had better start paying more taxes to hire some more cops. Lack of prosecution is indicative of a systemic problem impacting way way more than a person renting their house out. Show me a jurisdiction where there are no unsolved crimes except for the guy renting his house out. I won't hold my breath waiting, but I'll ask you to hold your breath while looking to prove me wrong.
Please please please do us all a favor get back on the thorazine and leave the sane people alone to pursue their own interests.
So your claim is that somehow using AirBnB makes crime perfectly legal and nobody on the property can be held accountable for any criminal actions? I have yet to see a legal argument claiming AirBnB provides prosecutorial immunity to renters, yet that is somehow your allegation. Are you sane, or did you just forget to take your medication for a prolonged time period?
I rent my property for a day to someone else that is perfectly legal. This happened without AirBnB regularly, AirBnB simply made it _more_ available. YOU do not have the right to tell me I can't rent my property to someone else without me using AirBnB. The onus is on you to present reasonable arguments as to why I lose property rights when using the service.
Your point is completely invalid.
Well suggest a way that people can be vetted properly then.
I'm not the one claiming AirBnB should be illegal, I simply gave an example of a possibly valid argument. If You are against someone renting their property _YOU_ need to provide an acceptable solution, not me.
Short of the property owner being there and held accountable for any issues I don't see how it could be done.
Well, I guess that explains a whole lot. You can't think of something which impacts a very small percentage of AirBnB so don't believe anyone with affiliation with AirBnB should have property rights. Thanks for proving my point.
For all that the Progressive Leftists claim to be against big business and for the working people, they sure as hell don't show it. AirBnB gives people the ability to rent out their property for a few extra bucks. It gives consumers a chance for a possibly better price and experience for accommodations when traveling. That takes the money away from Hotel conglomerates and massive union control and puts it back into the hands of the working people. Isn't that what the Left claims to be all for?
I find it very odd that instead of looking at perhaps viable concerns with "Does insurance cover certain events?" or "Do we need a vetting and registration process to ensure users are not criminals?" the politicians on the left move to _ban_ them with a vocal minority supporting them. The leftist followers and ideologues boycott and ostracize anyone who agrees with, works with, or uses the service. We just saw that with Uber, because how dare a person try to make money picking up people from the Airport when Union cabbies went on strike to support the lefts complaints about the immigration moratorium. By the way, a neighbor of mine who is a middle class legal immigrant may not be able to pay rent this month and he drives Uber Black and does not even handle airport pickups normally because #boycottuber (or whatever the hashtag is). Way to be for the little guys!
I think the bigger problem in society right now is a vocal minority of people refuse to have rational dialogue about any issue. The Right may have some past guilt , but the Left is most certainly guilty over the last several years and owns most of the media. Perhaps it's time for the Left to do what we demanded of the Right when they were deemed to be "too Christian", and start listening to the People as a whole instead of being dead set on forcing your ideology down people's throats.
I have copies of your fingerprints and retina scans I can use at any time.
Oh wait...
That is a joke, just in case an authority reads it..
Why would they need to do anything except relay location to existing ATC? They can't talk as there are no pilots. They fly along a narrowly defined corridor at an altitude that would not conflict with existing airports and all local aircraft would know about.
You are either trolling or not so bright. Show me an airport that does not border a freeway or major road. Not only that, but cars would have to be tracked by ATC to prevent crashing with each other. The current ATC systems lack the capacity.
I wonder how you don't hear about that all the time given helicopters exist? Oh that's right, they take off and land on designated zones you do not let people just flail arms around on.
Okay, you must be trolling because nobody can be that foolish. Not only are helicopters extremely rare in the skies (1-2 News choppers and an occasional Military/Coast Guard craft (that is the west SF Bay from SJC to Golden Gate), but they all take off and land from very controlled spaces. Helicopters are not only rare, but they don't take off and land in Google employee parking or your favorite restaurant parking. Get the difference?
As you accused some else in this thread, "you have displayed that you are an idiot and we can all assume the rest of your ideas are equally uninformed/absurd."
Safety issues for these flying cars, roads below them, and then consider the already overloaded ATC systems in the US. The idea may be interesting, but three years won't happen. Should it happen? Well, as the AC says above me, can we prevent drunk/bad drivers? Can we ensure that when one of these has an engine failure, it does not take out half a city block or a few dozen cars on the freeway making traffic much worse?
I hope he realizes also, that Helicopters are very dangerous and require a huge clear space for takeoff and landing. You are not going to have a bunch of loose propped cars buzzing around without people losing limbs.
We are not quite to the Jetson's level of technology, and won't be for way more than 3 years.
You didn't even bother to look for facts claiming that no method of searching was valid. Moderation on this site is, and has been, leftist for quite some time. Everything in my original post was based on facts, and your posts are based on feelings and a denial of the existence of facts. Yes, rational dialogue has left because you refuse to use any rational form of discussion. "Nuh uh" does not count as an argument.
This isn't about politics, rather, it's about humanity.
Liar, they are the same thing. You think that the US Government should forcefully take money from citizens regardless of their ability to give money to pay for foreign people. Meanwhile, US Citizens suffer from poor conditions remain in poor conditions because your ideology does not account for them. Which was my original point, US Citizens are in need of help too and the US Government is responsible for its own citizens first.
Leftist ideology functions on feeling, as you just demonstrated. Facts are seen as inconvenient, or simply ignored.
This was found doing a simple Google search for "refugee literacy rates". Stop trying to use Google as a source and use it as it was intended, as a Web Search Application.
The refugee education problem is not an issue of "try", it's an issue of both war and where they come from. Women and Girls in many of the countries where refugees come from are not allowed to go to school. At best they get ostracized for doing so, and at worse they get physically assaulted if they do. Syria was actually one of the best in the Middle East for across the board education, but that was before a bloody revolution started. Minors in general do not attend school in war torn areas, not because they don't want to but due to what should be obvious _real_ issues. Schools are destroyed, teachers get killed, all forms of people become targets for the other side (hostage, bondage, slavery), and families on the run can't settle in an area to establish schools.
You are not only oblivious to easy to find facts, you are oblivious to what War really is and does.
Oh, and fuck the censors who down mod anything that does not fit the Progressive Left narrative.
http://www.rch.org.au/immigranthealth/clinical/syrian-refugees/
If you wanted information you would use Google to find reports from reputable sources, like the UN and agencies working with the refugees. Not claim that since headlines don't match your 2nd hand personal anecdote you are not looking. Your personal anecdote does not represent reality, and no you don't pay me to be your researcher.
Perform a basic frigging Google search and you can find the information. How about doing some basic research instead of relying on other people telling you things? Hell, even if I gave you citations you would still argue, which is why you won't do any.
The immigrants and refugees we are bringing in to the US are mostly illiterate, and I'm not talking about English (yes, about 2/3rds). Never mind IT jobs, what job can you perform at all when you are not literate? How easy is it to train someone who can not read or write in their own language, let alone a predominantly foreign language. The majority of these people need a decade or more of education prior to being what we would consider productive members of society.Germany is suffering pretty heavily from this now, though you won't hear much about it on the US "news". Thousands of people packed into villages with no jobs, no prospect for a job, and a sadly a small percentage that does not want to try to learn German or engage with the country hosting them.
The younger kids coming in are going to be the best off, because they are at the right age for primary education. Adults are quite different as there is a stigma associated with having to go attend schools, and culturally women can be ostracized for attending school.
But you ask the pertinent question, which I don't see many of the pro-immigration politicians trying to answer. I hear buzz phrases like "it's our duty", but when we have millions in our own country living in poverty the priority is wrong. I have empathy for the refugees, but I lived in Detroit for 45 years and have as much empathy for those people as I do refugees from a distant country.
Sure, "White Supremacists" can be blocked from Reddit, but what about the leftist nutjobs who believe that you should destroy other people's property and physically assault people with a different political viewpoint? I don't look at reddit as a rule, but I'd be willing to bet that extremist left wing groups exist on reddit and will not receive the same treatment as the "alt-right".
Honest question: Which thing is upsetting to you, that "leftish nutjobs" aren't being banned, or that "White Supremacists" are being banned?
My problem is the hypocrisy and dishonesty, neither of the things you point out. If Reddit alleges that it supports Free Speech then both sides should be allowed to air their opinions. If they claim that the company policy stops negative behavior, that should be the global policy and not favor a particular group.
I'm very much for free speech. You can say what you want, and me being offended is not a crime. I find this whole "You have no right to offend me" culture to be psychotic and infantile. I don't have to agree with you, but me or someone else being offended does not make it right to silence you. If you are a moron espousing flat earth beliefs, people will present better ideas and facts to show others that you are wrong. This is how society progresses.
Oh the irony. Using an extremely biased opinion site's poll to claim someone else is uninformed...
Show me one statement I made which is not factual. When media cherry picks portions of a topic to fit an agenda, showing the rest of the topic is valid and correct. I'm not a Kelly Ann Conway fan, but that is exactly what her statement meant. Let me give you an easy example. The recent moratorium on immigration is touted as anti Muslim, racist, etc... ignores very basic facts.
Facts: The US does not run out and investigate people trying to enter the US. Like every other country in the world we rely on the country of origin to provide paperwork and validate status for any person trying to enter. The countries on the list are _all failed States_ who can not provide information on people traveling in and out of their countries with any reliability. Do you think there is any reliable Government agency in Syria or Libya who can validate that people leaving their countries are not criminals? (READ: That does not imply that everyone in a State is a criminal, it states explicitly that there is no way to validate the status of the foreign Government with any reliability.)
Given that set of facts most Americans (last poll was around 65%) understand why there is a travel ban and take no issue with it. Liberal media however won't provide any factual information on how immigration works, nor will them or the leftist politicians, explain the real issue. Instead, it's fear mongering opinions based on very little factual information.
I'm as critical and cynical of my Government as anyone you can find. At the same time, I will defend what is right when it's right. On this issue, and considering that the US is the largest target for terrorism in the world, I will defend them. Now if they had banned immigration from all 50 majority Muslim countries, or established religious testing (as some fear mongering liars have been attempting to claim), I would be fighting against the administration.
Sure, "White Supremacists" can be blocked from Reddit, but what about the leftist nutjobs who believe that you should destroy other people's property and physically assault people with a different political viewpoint? I don't look at reddit as a rule, but I'd be willing to bet that extremist left wing groups exist on reddit and will not receive the same treatment as the "alt-right". That is true with Facebook and Twitter, so I assume it true on Reddit. Feel free to prove me wrong on that, I'll be happy to read about Reddit banning left wing nut jobs.
Frankly, if I had to look at who is worse right now I'd say it's the extremist progressive leftists who see no issues using violence against people simply because they have a different political view. In the last couple years, I have seen no valid reports of white supremacists out beating people. We have seen dozens of faked claims, and many of those have resulted in charges, but the "Right" has not been rioting and beating anyone. I have seen countless instances of leftists doing just that, and worse. Last night you have a young lady being interviewed on ABC punched in the face and pepper sprayed by one of these "oppressed" liberals. You have another pulled out of a car and beaten for no reason.
When you have a Government not prosecuting, or even arresting people, who are terrorizing people and preventing their free speech you will end up with a whole lot of violence from the other side. Hence you have a Trump supporter shooting an agitator at a separate rally after protesters started throwing bricks and rocks at people supporting the speaker showed up to counter protest.
People need to pay close attention to the rhetoric being used by the left right now. Sadly, the useful idiots really can't see the irony and hypocrisy in shutting down other people's free speech by committing physical violence while carrying signs and chanting slogans claiming the other side is fascist. They are claiming that words are violence, and a teacher who is an advocate for violent protests claimed that words from someone raped her. I wish I was joking, but both of those are factual. The claims that words are somehow causing physical harm is being used to justify violence against anyone not agreeing with (or bending over for) the leftists.
Trying times we are in right now, and in places like California I envision it getting worse before it gets better.
Automation is already happening, and has been for 30 or so years. Ask an automotive factory worker about that one if you have doubts. While we could have a debate about the merits of minimum wage, the fact that you jumped to hyperbole makes me doubt your capacity to do so.
Minimum wage is absolutely a challenge to discuss and map out. When the only jobs available are clerks, cooks, and counter service it's difficult to argue against a living wage for those jobs. It's that, or Government assistance programs (sorry, you are not entitled to my money so I refuse to call them "entitlements"). I don't believe that it's necessary to have those jobs as the only jobs, but it requires a change to the economy to re-establish a strong middle class. Only so much can be automated with countless jobs, like construction, and those markets are down since the 2008 collapse.
You are right that Tech workers are not immune to automation. If you are as smart as you think you are, your value to a company will continue to rise instead of stagnating. You probably won't be doing the same thing in a few years that you are today, and if you expect and plan for that you are going to remain valuable. My market value has increased drastically over my 30 year IT career, and I never moved to management.